> Yes I did adjust pts-tcc to the then current uclibc in September 2011. > Unfortunately my recipe is very specific for my compile environment > and also the corresponding patches are for a quite old uclibc > version. I do not have time to clean up the data, nor is it > suitable for publishing unchanged. Sorry.
No problem. > If you have a good usage case you can describe it and try to motivate > me for the cleaning effort but the probability is low. I suspect "good usage" is a little subjective. But mostly I've been wanting to build a very very minimal rescue-system. Currently that consists of an initrd image, a kernel, and nothing else. Although there is also the possibility of using nfs-root for this, which would be more flexible and remove some of the size/fiddling constraints. Having a compiler present isn't a deal-breaker, but given the root filesystem is writable it would be nice to be able to download & compile random things. > Anyway, I can confirm that the solution is workable. > Not that I had any use for it :) Sure thing. > A corresponding thing made of the not-yet-existing bsd-licensed tcc > lookalike and musl would be possibly more useful, without the license > headache (otherwise you taint all binaries which you produce with lgpl > afaics). I did look at pcc, and a couple of other minimal compilers, but sadly none of them seem to be well suited for such an environment so there looks like there will need to be some hacking regardless of what I choose. Steve -- http://www.steve.org.uk/ _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
